Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
13 Aug 2017, 10:05
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
62% (02:07) correct
38%
(02:12)
wrong
based on 1105
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Some doctors believe that a certain drug reduces the duration of episodes of vertigo, claiming that the average duration of vertigo for people who suffer from it has decreased since the drug was introduced. However, during a recent three-month shortage of the drug, there was no significant change in the average duration of vertigo. Thus, we can conclude that the drug has no effect on the duration of vertigo.
Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
(A) If a drug made a difference in the duration of vertigo, a three-month shortage of that drug would have caused a significant change in the average duration of vertigo.
(B) If there were any change in the average duration of vertigo since the introduction of the drug, it would have demonstrated that the drug has an effect on the duration of vertigo.
(C) A period of time greater than three months would not have been better to use in judging whether the drug has an effect on the duration of vertigo.
(D) Changes in diet and smoking habits are not responsible for any change in the average duration of vertigo since the introduction of the drug.
(E) There are various significant factors other than drugs that decrease the duration of vertigo for many people who suffer from it.
Source :LSAT
Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
(A) If a drug made a difference in the duration of vertigo, a three-month shortage of that drug would have caused a significant change in the average duration of vertigo.
(B) If there were any change in the average duration of vertigo since the introduction of the drug, it would have demonstrated that the drug has an effect on the duration of vertigo.
(C) A period of time greater than three months would not have been better to use in judging whether the drug has an effect on the duration of vertigo.
(D) Changes in diet and smoking habits are not responsible for any change in the average duration of vertigo since the introduction of the drug.
(E) There are various significant factors other than drugs that decrease the duration of vertigo for many people who suffer from it.
Source :LSAT
01 Jan 2022, 05:45
Kudos
Bookmarks
Akela
EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT
The key here, like always, is that you must argue with the speaker. If you can’t come up with a couple reasons why this argument might be bogus, then you’re always going to struggle on the LSAT. It’s as simple as that.
Here’s my definition of “argue” as it applies to the LSAT: Show that the given evidence, even if it is true, doesn’t prove the conclusion.
Like this: The argument concludes, on the basis of a three-month shortage of a vertigo drug and the fact that the average duration of vertigo didn’t change during those three months, that the drug has no effect on the duration of vertigo. But I object to that conclusion, in a couple of different ways. First, just because there was “a shortage” doesn’t necessarily mean that vertigo sufferers didn’t have the drug. Maybe Walgreens was out, and new patients were unable to get it, but existing patients had three-month supplies at home, so they were never short of the drug. If that little story is true, then there was “a shortage” of the drug, but the drug could still have been taken, effectively, by existing patients.
Or, alternatively, what if the drug has effects that last more than three months? If that’s true, then patients might have run out of the drug for a few months, but the previous pills they had taken were still controlling their vertigo.
If you didn’t come up with one of these objections, or a similar objection, before looking at the answer choices, then I just don’t think you’re doing it right. You need to have a chip on your shoulder, and you need to fight back against the speaker. Being a pacifist isn’t going to get the job done on this test.
We’re asked to find an assumption “required by” the argument, which means we’re looking for a Necessary Assumption. I think something that defends against either of our two attacks would be a great answer. The argument has necessarily assumed that patients actually ran out of the drug, and the argument has necessarily assumed that the effects of the drug don’t last more than three months. If either of those things is untrue, then the argument fails.
A) Yes, exactly. This answer covers up for both of our attacks. If this answer is true, then our objection about the patients not running out of the drug doesn’t hold water. If this answer is true, then our objection about the drug’s effects lasting more than three months doesn’t work either. If this answer is false, it becomes, “If a drug made a difference in the duration of vertigo, a three-month shortage of that drug might not have caused a significant change in the average duration of vertigo,” which is exactly what we were saying in our objections. So this is a terrific answer for a Necessary Assumption. If it’s untrue, it makes the argument fail. Perfect answer.
B) No, this could only be used to prove that a drug is effective. The argument was trying to prove that a drug is not effective.
C) It’s irrelevant whether a longer study would or would not have been better. The point is: Do the existing facts prove the argument’s conclusion? Saying “a longer period would have been better” wouldn’t destroy the argument, so this answer is not necessary.
D) Huh? Way too strong. I don’t see how the argument assumed that diet and smoking didn’t have any effect on vertigo since the drug was introduced. This goes way further than the argument did.
E) The argument did not assume that anything else will help vertigo sufferers... it is solely focused on proving that one certain drug doesn't work.
We have to like A because it defends against our attacks. And we can be sure the answer is A because if A is not true, it destroys the argument.
General Discussion
14 Aug 2017, 21:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Was stuck between A and C.
But on negating A seemed to have a much more effect on the conclusion than C.
Was stuck between A and C.
But on negating A seemed to have a much more effect on the conclusion than C.
